I welcome this discussion and am pleased it has come to life again. As some of you may have noticed, I've been puzzling over the question whether Charles will be King at all or maybe the staff will be passed down directly to William. I am sure Prince Charles has asked himself these very question many a time and without his sense of steadifastness and endurance we would not be where we are today regarding these questions of the monarchy.

Some of the tension in Charles' chart seems to have eased off at present as the Prince (1st in line) has moved into a new 5 year period according to the Age Point technique that I am practicing. However, one of the major testimonies in Williams chart that I thought indicated that Charles' would abdicate was seeing that Venus, Lady of the 4th house, was conjunct the fixed star Algol.

I am glad that the Royal family seem to have moved into a calmer patch. Good gracious, I am glad I do not have to share their position in life, thinking of what they have had to go through.

I don't think that is a bad thing that we as astrologers occupy ourselves with these sort of questions. There will be crises and tensions, but we should keep an open eye for how matters may resolve themselves in a constructive and natural fashion. I think that issues of security and solution should be our motive, just so that no one thinks we are merely on a mission of casting evil spells.

The purpose of astrology as a tool of prognostication is to seek solutions.

One of the questions I have about the Monarchy is What start date would you apply to it, because I dont think it is the same as the Start date for UK current Government, The more I look at it the more I'm Thinking that Either Queen Anne 1707 Or her son the first hanover King George make more sense as a starting point as they were the First Crowned as Monarchs of Great Brittain and NOT as seperately Kings/Queens of England Scottland and Ireland (why wales not included I'm not certain?)

anyone one else have thoughts on that, I mean there are Several starting points to look at, and the Saros Series is definitely a thought... But I think it requires a bit more digging?

Granny

OK! Mark
My apologies and my respect for citizens Welsh, Scottish and Irish.
Marc, I know the name of your country, only use the name you used as Astrologers

Hello Mario,

Sorry. I did overeact a bit I didn't mean to personalise my point so much.

You are hardly alone in equating England=United Kingdom.

However, it is inaccurate and ignores an awful lot of history. Not least the history of the current Royal family.

You make an interesting point about Carter, Baigent etc. Let me check out their books before I turn my fire on them as cultural chauvanists!

Mark

Hello Granny,

That is an intriguing point about Queen Anne. You are correct that in terms of nomenclature she represents the first monarch of a unified Kingdom called Great Briain. This was because in 1707 both England and Scotland ceased to exist as strictly separate political entities and became the Kingdom of Great Britain.

So a royal chart for 1707 is feasible. However, the so called union of the crowns in 1603 when James the VI of Scotland became James 1 of England marked in royal terms a highly signifcant shift in the royal lineage. This marked not just a shift in the royal dynasty but a significant change in the realm covered by royalty in mainland Britain. This shift was visually marked in a change in the heraldic symbols of monarchy. From 1603 the Heraldic coat of arms of the English and Scottish monarchy became united in the the Lion and the Unicorn. The Lion was the traditional coat of arms of English monarchy while the Unicorn was used by Scottish monarchy. To this day British monarchs and the British government use this symbolism on all official documents ( for example UK passports). Its the equivalent of the Bald Eagle on American state seals. The royal line represented by James VI/I also introduced a royal bloodline dating back to ancient Scottish kings so that the Stuart kings had both a Celtic and Norman ancestry.

However the Stuart dynasty came to an end with Mary in 1714 and was replaced by the germanic House of Hanover. In 'blood' terms the modern British monarchy can be directly traced back to mostly germanic origins with the Hanoverians.

The House of Hanover (the Hanoverians) is a Germanic royal dynasty which has ruled the Duchy of Brunswick-L?neburg (German: Braunschweig-L?neburg), the Kingdom of Hanover and the Kingdom of Great Britain and the Kingdom of Ireland. It succeeded the House of Stuart as monarchs of Great Britain and Ireland 1714 and held that office until the death of Victoria in 1901.

Queen Victoria was the last British monarch of the House of Hanover; her son King Edward VII belonged to the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha since she could not inherit the German kingdom and duchies under Salic law. Those possessions passed to the next eligible male heir, her uncle Ernest Augustus I of Hanover, the Duke of Cumberland and Teviotdale?the fifth son of George III. In the United Kingdom, during World War I, King George V changed the house's name from Saxe-Coburg and Gotha to the currently serving House of Windsor in 1917.

So in relatively modern terms we have several potential charts:

1603: The first monarch reigning over England, Wales and Scotland.

(Although in de facto terms Athelstan was the first and only previous King to have achieved this before James I. William the Conqueror never ruled over Scotland or Wales in his reign although his descendants did conquer and and finally politically absorb Wales in 1536. )

1707 The first monarch of a unified Great Britain

1714 The first monarch of Great Britain from the Hanoverian Dynasty

1801 The first monarch to rule over a politically unified kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland

1917 The start of the current royal dynasty-the House of Windsor

1927 The first monarch to rule over the newly created Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

The Reason I wondered about 1603 Verses 1707 was because of the interuption of the line with Cromwells, Otherwise Anne's son George really does go pretty straight down to Elizabeth II. genetically speaking.

I mean its a pretty solid interuption!

Granny

Hello Granny,

The Reason I wondered about 1603 Verses 1707 was because of the interuption of the line with Cromwells, Otherwise Anne's son George really does go pretty straight down to Elizabeth II. genetically speaking

Well yes a republic and a regicide does count as a fairly big interruption to any royal line! However the Stuart royal line was restored under Charles II.

By the way George I was not Anne's son. All her children died either in childbirth or before her.

The German Hanoverian George I was actually only a second cousin of Anne. His claim to the throne was based on being a rather distant descendant of the Stuarts through his maternal grandmother, Elizabeth, daughter of James I.

Nevertheless, I take your point that the Hanoverians do have a genetic link to the Stuarts. On that basis we could argue for 1603 as the key date to use for a chart of the modern UK monarchy.

Following the same logic but tracing the lineage back even further one could argue that James I claim to succeed to throne after the death of Elizabeth I rested on his Mother Mary Queen of Scots and her strong claims to the throne with her Tudor ancestry. On that basis one could trace the royal line back through the Tudors and earlier Plantagenets to William the Conqueror. This would be a basis for arguing 1066 represents the beginning of an unbroken royal lineage.

However, William I ( the Conqueror) could only claim the English throne due to his blood links to the Anglo-Saxon royal line. William had a tenuous blood claim, through his great aunt Emma (wife of King Ethelred and mother of King Edward). So following the same logic one could trace back the royal line through the Anglo-Saxon kings. There is then a feint blood tie between the Anglo-Saxon kings (and the Kings of Wessex before them) and the modern British royal family. To state that there is no genetic connection between Athelstan and the modern Brirish monarchy is therefore incorrect although I accept its very distant!

This whole process gets a bit like infinite regression with the artist painting a picture of himself , painting a picture of himself etc........

I have tried to cut through all this by looking at the 1917 chart
(Proclamation of the House of Windsor 17th July 1917-Noon ( untimed)-London). I think it is a chart worth more investigation by astrologers. It certainly resonates strongly for the abdication crisis, the coronation of Queen Elizabeth II and the death of Princess Diana.

Between Aug- Dec 2009 a General Strike in defence of wages and jobs. Posible WAR!!!.

Interestingly, however, the strikes seem to be happening now...protests, at least. The Unions are up in arms.

GH

True. I suppose I was being pedantic in objecting to the idea of a General Strike which we have not seen since 1926 in the UK. However, if you are talking potential major industrial unrest ok that seems perfectly plausible.

We have certainly seen that before so its not unprecendented. For example the Miners and power workers strike in the early 1970's which led to power cuts and a three day week. I still remember as a child having to use candles, portable gas lanterns and stoves during the cuts and TV closing down at 10.00pm. The late 1970's was another such troubled period leading to the so called 'winter of discontent' in 1978-09. This was the major reason for the Conservatives winning the 1979 election under Margaret Thatcher.

With Pluto yet to go over the UK IC ( 1801 chart) as well as many other national charts I dont expect things to improve any time soon. In such a situation anything is possible. Although history tends to indicate workers are often scared to take mass industrial action during a downturn for fear of losing their job. However, the current situation is totally unique. Is it a recession or the second great depression as some economic analysts claim?

While the UK government are blaming the strikers for being 'protectionist' the issues are more complex. In particular the ultra free market decisions of the Eurpoean Court which allow employers to import workers from one part of the EU without allowing any applications from the local workforce. This is free trade of the worst sort where employers can import workers who are cheaper than any of the local workforce. This is only possible because of a legal loophole. Alone among the EU countties the UK and Ireland have refused to sign the EU social charter which would prevent such underhand practice by employers.

Yesterday we had the bizarre sight of Gordon Brown standing shoulder to shoulder with the Chinese Premier against 'protectionism'.

It is important to note that the events are produced by the action of the next eclipse of the day February 9, the same occurs at 21 ? Aquarius / Leo, this sector remains very sensitive because it is the position of the opposition last Saturn / Neptune (Jun 25, 2007), which also is present in the Government of Brown(Jun 27, 2007). Also be watching the Queen Elizabeth II,who also has the configuration of Saturn / Neptune, a little more loaded with Jupiter / Mars, with the progressed Moon at 21 ? Leo!.
Mario

As to the working of UK sociaology, would unions be up in arms be an issue for Monarchy or parliament? Isn't it Brown who they would be at issue with?

It seems to me that these are seperate issue's but possibly I am not seeing the connection?

Granny

Thanks for bringing us back into line Granny,

You are quite correct we have stayed rather far from the British Royal family! Its goes back to an old post from Mario where he made predictions for the UK monarchy AND the British economy. I agree the latter issue is off topic.

In future I suggest we all stick strictly to UK monarchy on this thread. If anyone wants to discuss the UK economy/Industrial relations I offer two options:

Post on the old thread I opened last year 'Pending Crisis for the UK?

http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=3223

Or open a fresh topic on this issue.

Mark

I'm not really a stickler of such things, I was just trying to figure out if it was related. But it certainly doesn't hurt to start a new thread.

Granny